Re: [PATCH] Install avinfo utility

[Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>]

Hi Pali,

>>> This utility is very useful for determining which A2DP codecs are supported
>>> by remote side. So install it to system as part of bluez package.
>>> ---
>>> Makefile.tools | 4 ++--
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>> 
>>> diff --git a/Makefile.tools b/Makefile.tools
>>> index 9b9236609..d52721612 100644
>>> --- a/Makefile.tools
>>> +++ b/Makefile.tools
>>> @@ -176,9 +176,9 @@ endif
>>> if TOOLS
>>> bin_PROGRAMS += tools/rctest tools/l2test tools/l2ping tools/bccmd \
>>> 			tools/bluemoon tools/hex2hcd tools/mpris-proxy \
>>> -			tools/btattach
>>> +			tools/btattach tools/avinfo
>>> 
>>> -noinst_PROGRAMS += tools/bdaddr tools/avinfo tools/avtest \
>>> +noinst_PROGRAMS += tools/bdaddr tools/avtest \
>>> 			tools/scotest tools/amptest tools/hwdb \
>>> 			tools/hcieventmask tools/hcisecfilter \
>>> 			tools/btinfo tools/btconfig \
>> 
>> I had no intention to install that tool since it is too limited
> 
> Sorry, but I have not seen any limitations with this tool yet. I'm using
> it very often. And also other people who use it have not mentioned any
> limitations or problems.
> 
> So could you be more specific what are those limitations?
> 
> Also it is the first thing which I'm saying people that should run and
> send me output of it if something related to A2DP does not work.
> 
> And because linux distributions do not package this utility and bluez
> developers (for me for unknown reasons) decided to not install it,
> result is that people have to always compile bluez from source to run
> this utility if their A2DP audio does not work or "remote" debugging of
> A2DP is needed.
> 
> So result is that who want to know why A2DP audio does not work is
> forced to compile & install bluez from sources and not to use from
> distribution package. And this probably not the expected state.
> 
> In any case, nobody reported to me any limitation with one exception
> that it cannot decode capabilities of some custom vendor codecs. But
> most of them are already supported as I sent needed patches in past.
> 
>> and makes too many assumption.
> 
> For example which assumptions?

that nothing else is happening right now. It backstabs the actual AVDTP and A2DP implementation.

>> In addition it has a bad name with no Bluetooth prefix.
> 
> So, lets rename it. What about "btavinfo"?

Lets extend btinfo with all sort of capabilities. Make the av portion just one of. I want to remove the multitudes of test utilities anyway. We have to many tiny utilities that are just scattered around and avinfo is just one of them.

> 
>> If we think it is useful to have such a test utility, then we need to clean this up first
> 
> What exactly to clean up first?
> 
> Note that I have already done cleanup of this utility.
> 
>> and put this into a larger btinfo work to gather appropriate information from a remote device for debug purposes.
> 
> I do not see how btinfo can be used for A2DP purposes. Seems this is
> utility for local controller info and not for remove A2DP.

This needs a bit thinking, but pretty much simple things like this:

	btinfo local
	btinfo avdtp <remote_bdaddr>

We can create a module handling system so that you can easily links existing tiny utilities into one.

Regards

Marcel